January 26th, 2009

Default

Warner Music Group doesn't know their own stuff

I've had a YouTube video removed. It's the Japanese trailer for Disney's Lilo & Stitch.

Why? Because it includes an excerpt of the Faith Hill song Baby, You Belong which was written specifically for the trailer. That song is owned by WMG. But, uh, WMG, the music is in this trailer because YOU ALLOWED IT TO BE.

And it's only an excerpt anyway.

YouTube does have a "dispute page". Two possible dispute options I could use are: "2. This video uses copyrighted material in a manner that does not require approval of the copyright holder. It is a fair use under copyright law." Or: "3. This video uses the copyrighted material at issue, but with the appropriate authorization from the copyright owner."

With either choice, I can "explain". What I'm thinking of writing, using option 2 since it is an excerpt only in that video, is:

The music is in this trailer by agreement between Warner Music Group and Disney Japan. The song was written specifically for this trailer. This trailer was its world premiere as the Japanese text announces in large letters. It's the "image song" for the trailer. This is common Japanese practice to include an excerpt of a new song (which is Fair Use anyway in this case) in a movie trailer to boost sales of the full song.

The question is: Should I go ahead with the dispute and potentially risk losing my account and the 230 videos still remaining on it? I think it's a pretty fair case to dispute. I mean, if anyone were to demand the video to be taken down, it should be Disney, since it's their trailer.